Secondary Links
Indicators:
Regional Consultative Meeting, Bangkok, 26-29 November 1996
Regional Consultative Meeting on Environmentally Sound and Sustainable Development Indicators
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and The Pacific
Report of the Meeting
I. ORGANIZATION OF THE MEETING
-
The Regional Consultative Meeting on
Environmentally Sound and Sustainable Development Indicators was organized
by ESCAP at Bangkok, in cooperation with the United Nations Department of
Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development and financial support of
the Government of Netherlands, from 26 to 29 November 1996.
A. Attendance
-
The Meeting was attended by representatives from
Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Republic of
Korea, Malaysia, Maldives, Nepal, The Netherlands, Pakistan, Philippines
and Thailand.
-
The United Nations bodies, specialized agencies
and related organizations represented included the Department of Policy
Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD), United Nations Centre
for Human Settlements (UNCHS), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA),
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO),
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and South Asia Cooperative
Environment Programme (SACEP).
B. Opening session
-
The Meeting was opened by the Executive
Secretary of ESCAP, who warmly welcomed the participants to the Meeting
and the one-day workshop which was being organized to accelerate the
process of development of indicators of sustainable development and to
contribute to the global efforts being put forth by the United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The Executive Secretary
commended CSD for the leadership and motivation provided in coordinating
global efforts towards producing a list of universally acceptable
indicators of sustainable development.
-
Since the Meeting was to review and examine the
list of indicators and its applicability and relevance to the Asian and
Pacific region, he requested the participants to provide guidance on these
matters including the procedures and programmes for field testing the
indicators in countries of the region. The Executive Secretary expressed
his deep appreciation to the Government of the Netherlands for providing
the financial support towards the organization of this important Meeting.
-
The statement from Mr. Nitin Desai,
Under-Secretary-General for the Department of Policy Coordination and
Sustainable Development (DPCSD) was read by the Assistant Director, Human
Development, Institutions and Technology Branch of DPCSD. It expressed
appreciation for ESCAP's activities in promoting the CSD Work Programme on
Indicators of Sustainable Development in the Asian and Pacific region. It
was noted that field testing of indicators of sustainable development in
the countries of the Asian and Pacific region was an important step in
guiding the process towards sustainable development in the region.
C. Election of officers
-
The Meeting elected Mr. A. Aziz Qureshi
(Pakistan) as Chairperson, Ms. Sharada Bajracharya (Nepal) as
Vice-Chairperson and Mr. Ruisheng Yue (China) as Rapporteur.
D. Adoption of the agenda
-
The Meeting adopted the following agenda:
-
Opening of the Meeting.
-
Adoption of the agenda.
-
Integrated environmental planning, including the use of
environmental indicators: the pioneering experience of the
Netherlands.
-
Global efforts at indicator development: work programme of the
United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.
-
Core set of indicators for sustainable development in Asia and the
Pacific: review of methodologies.
-
Experiences of countries and agencies in indicator development.
-
Work programme and procedures for pilot testing of indicators for
sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific.
-
Other matters.
-
Adoption of the report.
II. INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL
PLANNING, INCLUDING THE USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS:
THE PIONEERING EXPERIENCE OF THE
NETHERLANDS
(Item 3 of the agenda)
-
The presentation of the representative of
Netherlands provided a context for understanding how indicators could be
used and be useful in charting a course toward sustainable development.
The indicator development process took practical shape with the initiation
of the first National Environmental Policy Plan (NEPP). This plan was
driven by both a "credible story" and "optimism". The
main assumption in the plan was that economic growth could be combined
with a substantial reduction in emissions.
-
It was emphasized that target setting and use
of indicators played a major role in the Dutch environmental policy plans.
Agreement on targets was accomplished through a national discussion and
consensus on environmental problems involving all stakeholders. It enabled
the country to focus on environmental outcomes and decision-making.
Adoption of the life-cycle approach helped in defining problems at their
source and identifying actors and organizations responsible for action.
Based on this approach, themes (environmental problems) and target groups
(economic sectors) were identified, leading to integrated and focused
efforts for environmental protection.
-
Eight themes identified included climate
change, acidification, eutrophication, toxic and hazardous pollutants,
waste disposal, disturbance, groundwater depletion and squandering. The
responsible actors or target groups contributing to these themes included
agriculture, industry, energy, retail trade, consumers, construction
industry, waste disposal industry, drinking water supply industry, sewage
and waste water treatment plants and research institutes. Using
highly-aggregated indicators, performance towards these targets was
assessed on an yearly basis and presented to the Parliament.
-
In the subsequent discussion, many participants
showed interest in the replicability of the Dutch planning methodology in
the Asian and Pacific region. The Netherlands representative informed that
a few case studies would be conducted in selected countries of the region
and a regional workshop would be organized in collaboration with ESCAP in
1997 to review the experience of planning for sustainable development.
III. GLOBAL EFFORTS AT INDICATOR
DEVELOPMENT: WORK PROGRAMME OF THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
(Item 4 of the agenda)
-
The representative of the United Nations
Department of Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development (DPCSD) in
his statement gave a brief description of the activities leading up to the
1997 Special Session of the General Assembly which will review the
progress since the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED). He then provided an overview of the United Nations
Commission on Sustainable Development's programme of work on indicators of
sustainable development, its origin and evolution. He emphasized that
indicators are not an end in themselves, but only a tool to help measure
progress or give a picture of where things stand at a particular moment in
time. Note was made of the gradual realization among countries that
traditional economic measures of progress such as GDP do not provide a
complete picture of societal well-being and that in recent years emphasis
has been given to finding other ways to measure development that take into
account the social, economic and environmental dimensions.
-
The importance of having good information
available for decision-makers was stressed while noting the paradoxical
situation that although information and information sources are
proliferating at an astounding rate, decision-makers often find it
difficult to obtain the right kind of information that aids in
decision-making. Indicators provide a means to help bridge the information
gap. Although indicators have many advantages in terms of providing
concise and aggregated information, they also have various pitfalls that
needed to be kept in mind while using them.
-
The criteria used in selecting the core set of
CSD indicators and the process of consensus building that was used in
selecting them was also described. The Driving Force-State-Response (DSR)
framework was explained as a means of organizing the indicator and
providing an appropriate analytical framework. The CSD Work Programme on
indicators was explained, pointing to the current status of its
implementation, including completion of the methodology sheets for each
indicator that was contained in the publication "Indicators of
Sustainable Development: Framework and Methodologies". The various
elements of the methodology sheets were also described in a concise
manner.
-
The efforts of ESCAP and the interest of the
participants in the work programme on indicators was greatly appreciated
and it was mentioned that only through efforts such as field testing at
the country level it would be possible to implement the programme and see
the wider use of sustainable development indicators.
- In the subsequent discussions it
was noted that the CSD work programme provided a useful background and
reference material which could help countries substantially in their field
testing procedure.
IV. EXPERIENCES OF COUNTRIES AND
AGENCIES IN INDICATOR DEVELOPMENT
(Item 5 of the agenda)
-
Under this agenda items, the
representatives of participating countries and agencies provided a brief
review of their efforts towards sustainable development planning (see
annex 1).
V. CORE SET OF INDICATORS FOR
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC: REVIEW OF METHODOLOGIES
(Item 6 of the agenda)
-
The meeting had before it the document ENR/RCESSD/2,
"Core set of Indicators for Sustainable Development in Asia and the
Pacific: Review of Methodologies". The document, as presented,
covered the main aspects of the process of indicator development as well
as, the major efforts in indicator development and proposed a methodology
for the selection of a menu of indicators which could be used for testing
in the selected countries of the region. It was stated that the process of
indicator development was complex, iterative and cyclical. The various
steps required to be taken in the selection of indicators were identified
drawing from the experiences of UN-DPCSD, OECD, ADB and Netherlands. The
importance of clearly identifying uses and audiences of the indicators was
emphasized. That a conceptual framework should be adopted to form the
basis of the whole exercise was stressed.
-
Strong emphasis was placed on the actual
selection of a core set of indicators. The difficulties in selecting
issues, use, and in obtaining supporting data were explained. The document
proposed a menu of possible indicators suitable for the Asian and Pacific
region. The menu took into account the Regional Action Programme approved
by the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development held in 1995
and reflected the regional priority issues.
-
The meeting noted that the paper presented a
good review of methodological options available to countries in initiating
their own indicator development programmes and found that it had useful
information on the selection of priority issues.
-
Following the above presentation and
discussions, the Meeting decided to continue its deliberations in three
working groups. The working groups considered the following items for
discussions.
I. Selection of priority issues and related indicators;
II. Review of related methodology sheets;
The outcome of the deliberation on
these items in the working groups were presented to the Meeting which felt
that this exercise in working groups was a very fruitful simulation of
methodology that could be adopted at national level. It could be
replicated at national level through a national inter-agency institutional
coordinating mechanism (a group of experts representing concerned
agencies/institutions) for selection of priority indicators and developing
their methodology sheets. The recommendations of the meeting on
prioritization of indicators and development of their methodology sheets
are reflected in the conclusion and recommendations part of this report.
VI. WORK PROGRAMME AND PROCEDURE
FOR PILOT TESTING OF INDICATORS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA AND THE
PACIFIC
(Item 7 of the agenda)
-
The meeting had before it the document ENR/RCESSD/1.
It was pointed out that the testing of the indicators of sustainable
development would include organization, implementation, assessment,
institutional support and capacity building as well as reporting
-
The organizational aspect would involve setting
up of a national coordination mechanism and a focal point while
implementation would include selection of priority issues, matching these
with indicators, assessing data availability for priority indicators,
establishing necessary arrangements to collect the missing data, where
possible, and collecting and compiling data for the indicators selected.
-
The assessment would cover technical, decision
making and institutional support or capacity building issues. The
technical issues primarily pertain to methodology sheets for describing
each indicator, the source, continuity in delivery and reliability of data
as well as the data product through which analytical information is
conveyed to the decision makers. The decision making issues involve the
usefulness of the indicators to national decision makers and their
application to the decision making process. Institutional support and
capacity building issues basically relate to the provision of technical
assistance and support for data collection, compilation and analysis as
well as for other training and capacity building needs for the development
of a national indicator programme.
-
The reporting aspect is another very important
aspect of field testing procedure as it could enable exchange of
information and help in assessing the usefulness of indicators in
different situations. It could also assist in evaluating and alleviating
constraints. Accordingly, the structure of the report after a brief
introduction, should highlight, the identification and selection of
indicators, their usefulness, as well as problems and challenges faced in
their use. Appropriate recommendations may also be included in the report
(Annex 2).
-
Subsequent to the presentation
and discussion, the meeting divided itself into three working groups to
deliberate on various issues related to this agenda item. The working
group reports were presented to the plenary and the conclusions and
recommendations on the agenda item are reflected in the next section of
this report.
VII. CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
-
The participants in general found the meeting
and the working group sessions to be extremely useful for understanding
the relationship between priority setting and measurement in charting a
course to sustainable development. The background information provided,
particularly the framework methodology sheets and the Core Set of
Indicator for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific: Review of
Methodologies, were seen as a useful basis for establishing national
indicator programmes. Despite some problems that were identified during
the discussion, participants felt that the framework and methodologies
could also form an excellent basis for monitoring progress towards
sustainable development along social, economic, environmental and
institutional lines.
-
The process of having small group discussions
was found to be very productive aspect of the Regional Meeting which
provided a positive mechanism for initiating national testing. The working
group sessions were a realistic way to simulate what the countries would
have to go through at the national level in establishing priorities. The
background materials provided during the Meeting were considered as useful
tools in starting a programme on the development of indicators.
- Delegates recognized that developing and using
indicators would take time, effort, resources and commitment over the long
term. It was considered to be a difficult process, being complex and
multidimensional. It was necessary to be practical, pragmatic and
flexible, building on the particular strengths that countries already had,
whether it was well-organized data base, national environmental action
plan or a well-organized planning mechanism.
-
It was noted that, in many instances,
information and data were already being collected for several indicators
at the national level. It was agreed that, where appropriate, existing
data and indicators should be fully utilized as the basis for a balanced
set of indicators which represented the maximum possible range of
sustainable development concerns. There was a need to focus more on
aggregated indicators of sustainable development in addition to individual
indicators. There was also a general consensus that more work was needed
to be done on institutional indicators.
-
For the indicators programme to be successful
at the national level, the need for follow-up and support from UN agencies
and bilateral donors was emphasized. Sharing of information, capacity
building, and initiation of activities to exchange experiences among the
testing countries were identified as particularly important.
-
With regard to testing at the national level,
participants felt that mechanisms for coordination would have to be
country specific given the variety of different governmental structures.
However, the idea of having a national inter-agency coordination mechanism
that could bring together various stakeholders was broadly endorsed.
Normally, such a mechanism should include key decision making bodies such
as finance, planning, national councils or committees on environmental
protection, national councils of sustainable development, statistical
offices, environmental and sectoral ministries, where appropriate, with
the focal point agency left to government discretion. A Technical Task
Force might also be needed to handle some of the more detailed issues
requiring study.
-
Testing countries may wish to consider
preparing a written action plan to cover their indicators development
programme.
-
While participants did not believe that a large
commitment of resources would be needed to initiate a national programme
on indicators, the need for some capacity enhancement efforts at the
country level to get the process started was identified. Additional
country or regional level workshops to brief working level staff on
indicators could be useful. In addition, countries might require some
technical assistance in the early stages of the programme.
-
Twinning arrangements were endorsed, but it was
recognized that such arrangements need not necessarily involve a developed
and a developing country, but might include countries at different levels
of indicator use and development. It was also felt that assistance might
be needed in facilitating arrangements between countries, and ESCAP and
DPCSD, could serve as catalyst in this regard.
-
The Meeting noted with
appreciation the offer of the Government of Netherlands for conducting
case/feasibility studies in selected countries of the region in
collaboration with ESCAP and supporting a regional meeting to be organized
by ESCAP in 1997 to review the studies and approaches to planning for
sustainable development.
VIII. OTHER MATTERS
(Item 8 of the agenda)
-
The Meeting expressed its
sincere gratitude to the Government of the Netherlands for providing both
the financial and technical inputs necessary for the Meeting and
appreciated the efforts of ESCAP and UNDPCSD in organizing the Meeting and
the Workshop.
IX. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT
(Item 9 of the agenda)
-
The report was unanimously adopted by the
Meeting on 29 November 1996.